Random trivia; VR is so 90s 🤪 - this is a photo of an offer for a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFX1_Headgear for ~500USD in 1997. Apparently it was compatible with games like Mech Warrior 2 and did already feature stuff like head tracking for compatible games.

  • LEONHART@slrpnk.net
    6·
    7 hours ago

    This is the kind of magazine page that 90s-kid-me would stare at for hours fantasizing over. Even looking at it now, it’s surprisingly easy for me to ignore the objective technical limitations and get hyped.

    Side note: can we talk about that 1ST PC GUN on the mid-left there? Dude…

    • Beko Pharm@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      1·
      6 hours ago

      I’m not even sure why this was in one of my drawers at all. Stumbled over it randomly today and was confused by this initially because somehow “VR” is marked with “brand new shit” in my head. I should know better but kinda forgot all about it.

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    11·
    11 hours ago

    Had a CyberMaxx VR headset back in the days. It had a whopping resolution of 505x230 per eye at a combined 60 Hz (so each eye only got 30 Hz). Headtracking worked with 3 degrees of freedom. The included mouse driver for DOS made the head tracking available for every DOS game even if it didn’t have support. It came with Tekwar and a Flight Unlimited demo I never could get to run.

    Some games worked with stereoscopic 3D. That was about the only really awesome thing about the headset. But the 30 Hz displays made sure that you could only play for a short while anyways. Descent was nausea inducing on its own. But in VR it was a guaranteed pukefest.

    Thinking about playing with the headset was always much better than actually doing it. I’d pull it out every few years and then put it back into storage. Last I heard it died at my brother’s.

    • Beko Pharm@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      4·
      9 hours ago

      Heh, during that time I only toyed around with cheap anaglyph 3d glasses. I totally love that Elite Dangerous still features such a mode to this day 🤪

  • soulsource@discuss.tchncs.de
    5·
    12 hours ago

    Yes. That’s why I was utterly confused when big companies dug out hat dead horse (yet) again.

    And they are still trying to ride it.

    • Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social
      13·
      10 hours ago

      Because technology advanced a tiny bit and it does make more sense.

      Even if it dies now, it will come back with even better hardware.

      Your statement sounds like, “why did they release the iPhone, there are already PDAs”

      • soulsource@discuss.tchncs.de
        2·
        9 hours ago

        It’s funny that you mention the iPhone - a device that had zero innovation compared to its competitors, and just managed to take the market because of marketing.

          • soulsource@discuss.tchncs.de
            1·
            4 hours ago

            Revisionist? I am old, I was there. But if you don’t believe me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian

            (And while I didn’t own a Symbian phone myself, a good friend did. Oh, but what I owned was a tablet computer. Way back in 2002. And now you will likely call me a Revisionist again, because I owned a device before Apple invented it…)

            • Gamma@beehaw.orgEnglish
              1·
              2 hours ago

              I’m aware of Symbian, it ran on over half of the world’s smartphones before 2009. It’s not some hidden knowledge.
              You’re the one who said it had zero innovations, which is patently false. Here’s a short piece from AllAboutSymbian.com on the topic. I never claimed they invented the smartphone or anything like that, but it’s obvious that you think I did since you added that part about the tablet.

              This conversation is not worth my time, you’re free to think whatever you want. Have a nice day!